Monday, February 17, 2014

Rumors about who might challenge Rahm Emanuel in the 2015 mayoral election have started to circulate, with mentions of Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle, Chicago Teachers Union President Karen Lewis and a handful of aldermen.

But one person has already declared his intent to run. On his to-do list is pension reform, an elected school board and getting Chicago's fiscal house in order.

He’s C.J. Elliott, a 19-year-old freshman at DePaul University.

OK, I know what you're thinking. But hold off on the eye roll. Elliott, who's majoring in business management, acknowledges his aspiration to lead a city of 2.7 million people before he can legally drink is lofty and might seem like a joke.

“That’s been my problem with some people,” said Elliott, a Detroit native. “But I think that if I offer good policies and show that I’m serious about what I mean, then I think people will start to believe me.”

I’ll attest: He sounds fairly serious. As he explained to me his plan to modify the city’s pension system — remove defined benefits from the retirement options and instead offer defined contributions — I realized his run for office is no childish ploy. He’s done his research. He said he’s running because he’s visited Chicago throughout his life and stayed abreast of its problems, many of which are like Detroit’s. He’s also aware of the controversies expected to plague Mayor Emanuel’s re-election campaign.

For instance, Elliott questions why, less than a year after voting to close nearly 50 district-run schools, the Chicago Board of Education recently approved the addition of seven new charter schools.

“(The board) said it was because of the location of the schools, but I find that hard to believe,” Elliott said, adding that this is just one reason why the school board should be elected instead of hand-picked by the mayor.

He said his No. 1 priority if elected would be to put City Hall on a path to financial solvency, as that, he said, is the bedrock to solving anything else.

“Before you can fix the murder rate and education, you have to get the finances in line,” he said.

Although only 19 years old, Elliott is strikingly eloquent and informed. Still, his age is obviously a hindrance.

Convincing voters he’s legit may not be Elliott’s only problem. He must also meet the requirements set by the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners, which he’s read all about in the 2015 Election Information Pamphlet. While he’s certainly old enough to be on the ballot (minimum age is 18), he might struggle to meet the residency requirement. Elliott currently lives in DePaul’s dorms, but hopes to move to an off-campus apartment by June and switch his voter registration to Illinois at that time. He will also need to collect the signatures of 12,500 registered Chicago voters, and I don’t expect many of his college classmates will be eligible to sign.

Like a true Millennial, he’s already campaigning in the digital world. (That's how I found him.) He tweets often from @CJElliott2015, sharing a mix of opinions, news stories and inspirational quotes. He has a website, http://cjelliott2015.com/, but it’s under construction now as he prepares and proofreads his policy positions, he said. He expects it to be live within a month.

Elliott’s parents first learned about their son’s plan to seek office back in November, shortly before FOX 32 interviewed him about it. He said his dad, Charles Elliott, who owns a medical supplies distribution company, has helped shape his policies. His mom, Jackie, has already designated herself his campaign manager.

Like any loving parents, Charles and Jackie Elliott are fully behind their son’s mayoral aspirations — with one caveat.

“They want school to be the number one priority right now,” Elliott said.

---

The next Chicago mayoral election will take place Feb. 24, 2015. Anyone in particular you'd like to see run?

Monday, January 27, 2014

A handful of satirical Bruce Rauner accounts have popped up on Twitter recently. Each mocks Rauner's alleged $18 watch, his flip-flop on minimum wage and his enormous wealth. None has amassed many followers or received anywhere near the amount of attention as the infamous F-bomb-dropping @MayorEmanuel account.

It’s hard to imagine how these accounts could be very effective. Regardless, some of the tweets are entertaining.

All the candidates running for governor have at least one parody account, except Tio Hardiman.

Sunday, January 26, 2014

If you didn’t vote for Mitt Romney in the 2012 presidential election, watching the new documentary “Mitt” won’t make you wish you had. On the other hand, if you did vote for him, the film will only reaffirm your decision.

While the film humanizes a man often criticized for seeming robotic, it doesn’t cast Romney as a would-have-been savior for the nation. Instead, it paints him as an affluent family man who -- like any candidate vying for the most powerful position in the world -- genuinely believed that if elected he would steer America toward a better tomorrow. The film also captures just how mentally and physically exhausting a presidential run can be and the toll it can take on a candidate and his family.

The documentary, now available on Netflix, follows Romney on his two failed quests for the presidency. The film’s opening scene shows a nervous Romney sitting in a hotel suite surrounded by family on Election Night 2012. As results trickle in from state to state, it becomes clear Romney’s internal polls were wrong. President Barack Obama would be re-elected to a second term. Romney asks if anyone knows Obama’s telephone number. The Republican candidate realizes he’ll need to give the president a congratulatory call by the night’s end. “Didn’t think about that,” Romney says, with an uneasy chuckle.

My favorite scene of the film -- besides the one in which Romney steams the cuffs of his tuxedo while he’s wearing it -- is an interview with Josh Romney, one of the candidate’s five sons, in the midst of the 2008 primary. “Mitt” director Greg Whiteley, who sits behind the camera, asks Josh, “Ever once have you thought, man, this just isn’t worth it?”

Josh admits it’s hard to answer the question honestly because his kneejerk reaction is to parrot the “Oh absolutely” response he learned in media training. Whiteley tells him to go ahead and give the media-appropriate response, then translate that to what he’s really feeling.

Here’s Josh’s sincere answer:

“They talk and they say, why can’t we get someone good to run for president? And this is why. This is why you don’t get good people running for president. What better guy is there than my dad? Is he perfect? I mean, absolutely not. He’s made mistakes. He’s done all sorts of things wrong. But for goodness sakes, here’s a brilliant guy whose experience is turning things around, which is what we need in this country. This is the guy for the moment. And we’re in this, and you just get beat up constantly. ‘Oh Mitt Romney’s a flip-flopper. He’s this. He’s that.’ You just kinda go, man, is this worth it? This is awful.”

What refreshing candor.

“Mitt” feels more like a family video about life on the campaign trail than a behind-the-scenes look at campaign strategy. The focus is on Romney’s family, not his advisers.

If at the end of the 2012 election, you still found yourself wondering, “Who is Mitt Romney? The real Mitt Romney?” even after his many years in the political limelight, this documentary will start to answer that -- something I’m afraid his campaign never managed to do.

Wednesday, December 11, 2013

There's snow on the ground. So comes the endless stream of gripes from Chicagoans about how awful winter is.

'Tis the time of year -- following the season's first lasting snow -- when everyone likes to remind everyone else how much they hate this weather. People suddenly long for summer. Many talk as though Chicago's winters are nothing more than a trade-off for the warmer months. And without fail, there are the people who threaten to flee Chicago for Los Angeles, San Francisco or some other place where it's warm and sunny 350 days out of the year, but rarely do.

Why so much disdain for Old Man Winter? Why not welcome this beautiful season, during which time our part of the world becomes so peaceful and serene? Why not embrace the physical obstacles caused by the snow and use them as an excuse to live more slowly?

I think it's gratifying to walk 10 minutes in below-zero wind chills then step inside and feel your skin thaw. I love hearing the crunch of hardened snow underneath my feet. I especially like the glow of a snowy night sky. And isn't it fun to wake up, check the temperature, see that it's 3 degrees and make a game of dressing strategically to shield yourself from the cold? Plus, it's nice to have an excuse to stay inside on the weekends, cozy up under a wool blanket and grab a good book (read: watch hours of Netflix).

Friday, November 22, 2013

The most whimsical place in Chicago during Christmastime will have a bit less glee this year. According to RedEye, the Chriskindlmarket won't be serving mulled wine in a boot at this year's festival, instead replacing the adorable souvenir mug with a much less intriguing design (to the left).

I'm more upset about this than I should be, but that's mostly because my mom, who stayed with me last week, noticed my boot mug from last year's market and requested one in her stocking this Christmas.

So now what do I do? I can't disappoint mom. I've already placed bids on eBay for mugs from the 2007 and 2012 festivals, but I'm afraid demand is going to skyrocket. If you happen to have any unwanted boot mugs cluttering up your cabinets, holler.

I suppose there's always Christmas 2014. As the RedEye story states, this isn't the first year the market has strayed from the boot design since its debut in 2005. In 2008, the mug was shaped like a hat.

Thursday, November 07, 2013

The New York Times has a fascinating front page story today about the intersection of industries that thrive off of women hating their bodies. The piece explains how large-busted, small-waisted and long-legged mannequins have become the norm in Venezuela, because they mimic a female population that has increasingly opted to have cosmetic surgery in search of the perfect body.

The photo accompanying the story (shown here) is both disturbing and comical. Nothing about these mannequins' figures looks natural, which would be fine... if their entire purpose wasn't to model clothing meant for real-life women. The reason these mannequins are shaped so unrealistically is because they are meant to represent the appearance of Venezuelan women, many of whom have gone under the knife to look like walking sexpots.

As the story notes, plastic surgery has become so common in the country that the late Hugo Chavez, while in office, urged against the procedures, as poor women were splurging on them versus covering basic expenses. (The story also says the prevalence of plastic surgery in Venezuela is no more common than in most other countries -- but I'm not positive if the U.S. is an exception.)

What prompted Venezuelan women to become so dangerously obsessed with their looks? Once they started snagging Miss Universe titles, the story explains. Quotes from Osmel Sousa, the longtime head of the Miss Venezuela pageant, show he clearly has no remorse for teaching women to hate themselves:

"When there is a defect, I correct it. If it can be easily fixed with surgery, then why not do it?" ... I say inner beauty doesn't exist. That's something that unpretty women invented to justify themselves."

The worst part about this view is that it's not uncommon. This deluded thinking leads too many men to objectify women and causes women to ruthlessly critique their own attributes as well as those of other women.

… Sigh. One must pick her poison, I guess. Are these abnormally voluptuous mannequins any worse than those that fill American clothing stores, all of which are size 2 frames with narrow hips and legs for days? It seems to be considered commercially beautiful, you must either be artificially curvy or starving. There’s no way to win.

Friday, October 11, 2013

It’s called Krokodil ("crocodile" in Russian), named after the scaly effect it can have on a person’s skin. The moonshine drug is a cocktail of codeine, iodine, paint
thinner, gasoline, lighter fluid, hydrochloric
acid and red phosphorus. Users inject it, typically into their
arms, legs or groin. It's highly addictive and highly destructive. Persistent use can destroy organs and cause flesh to rot.

Sounds tempting, right? Apparently
to some.

According to the Southtown
Star, three people in Will County were treated at Presence Saint Joseph
Medical Center this week after using the toxic drug. All three patients were
women, all younger than 25.

From the story:

“[The victims'] arms and legs are significantly maimed from
gangrene. [Dr. Abhin Singla, director of addiction services at the hospital]
said one patient will likely face years of surgeries to recover her ability to
walk.”

Wednesday, October 02, 2013

I'm sure by now you've seen the Jimmy Kimmel man-on-the-street skit where a camera crew asked random passersby if they prefer Obamacare of the Affordable Care Act. If not, watch below.

Unaware Obamacare and the ACA are in fact just different names for the same thing, most interviewees say they prefer the ACA because -- duh, as its title suggests -- it's affordable.

Just like the countless other man-on-the-street skits of late-night comedy shows past, this exists to give informed viewers a chance to feel superior and shake their heads at the subjects' extreme ignorance. Assuming these folks are not actors, you do wonder how they lived the past three years without realizing "Obamacare" and "Affordable Care Act" can be, and are, used interchangably. The clip also makes you wonder how many other folks out there are equally unplugged from current events.

It'd be nice if the illogical fear of one day being stopped on the street by a late-night comedy show camera crew would prompt more people to seek out *factual* (key word here) information, but I suppose there are other reasons besides pure laziness that explain why so many are ill-informed. However, I find it hard to sympathize when we live in the age of internet and smartphones, when many people have an infinite amount of knowledge constantly at their fingertips.

Wednesday, September 25, 2013

Have you recently had a run-in with a crabby neighbor? Cursed at some imbecile driver who cut you off? Bumped into a careless fool on the sidewalk too captivated by his phone to notice you approaching?

We can kid ourselves that we’re the same courteous Midwesterners who wait our turn and hold the door open for each other, but something has changed. Oh, we’ll still hold the door open. But too many among us now expect a thank-you, and if we don’t get one, we might slam the door in your face. We’re angry at corporations, politicians, God, the CTA, you name it, but we have no access to them, so we take it out on each other.

I recently asked dozens of acquaintances: Have you experienced random moments of urban rage? Story after story emerged involving senseless hair-trigger attacks. Middle fingers. Spitting. Dark threats. The most personal insults you can imagine. Many of my responders were victims; others were perpetrators. One friend reported that he had so insulted a man in the car beside him by speeding past that the man caught up and hurled a chicken at my friend’s windshield. A whole, feathered, dead chicken. How angry do you have to be to throw a chicken at someone?

But aren't Midwesterners known for their patience and politeness? What gives? Ruby's article caused me to revisit a concept I've never quite understood -- the idea of the "Midwest Mentality." Since first hearing it five years ago, I have yet to pin down exactly this term means. Kind? Genuine? Family-oriented? Fan of Big 10 football?

Thursday, September 19, 2013

Within the first two minutes of watching my boyfriend
play the game, I wanted to join the coalition of people convinced violent
video games are responsible for mass shootings and all other crimes too brutal for
us to fathom. But — after 15 minutes of watching, I acknowledged its
brilliance.

Sure, the game has inexcusable flaws. It portrays women
solely as objects of desire. A shootout erupts every five minutes, and
the high quality graphics make the violence and blood spatter almost too realistic to bear. The game certainly earns its
“M” for mature rating.

But the genius in Grand Theft Auto 5 is its satire.

The characters spend most of their time stealing cars and
driving around — hence the title — and the radio is usually on. The news
stories and commercials mock certain prejudices and social constructs in American culture. For instance, one commercial advertised the prison-industrial complex. A news story about a
string of robberies at ATMs reported that law enforcement officials were advising people
to be on high alert, aka, watch out for everyone who looks different than you. The game's narrative, focused on three male anti-heros, is captivating and well-written. Even though I'm not the one playing the game, I look forward to watching its story unfold.

Grand Theft Auto 5 is a work of art worthy of applause. But absolutely no one under age 17 should play it. They are too young to be exposed to
this degree of violence, especially when cast as entertainment, and the game’s best aspect
— its subtle messages — will be lost on them. I would hope any parent who buys this game for their minor is ignorant of its content.

Wednesday, September 11, 2013

On this 12th anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, many people on Twitter are revisiting what is arguably the most controversial and jarring photo from that horrific day: The Falling Man.

I won't post it directly on here, as the issue of whether it was ethical to publish this photo -- as the New York Times and countless other newspapers did -- is still debated today, and I certainly don't know the right answer. If you want to see it, Esquire has it here along with an in-depth piece about the image. But I'd say the excerpt below is enough.

They began jumping not long after the first plane hit the North Tower, not long after the fire started. They kept jumping until the tower fell. They jumped through windows already broken and then, later, through windows they broke themselves. They jumped to escape the smoke and the fire; they jumped when the ceilings fell and the floors collapsed; they jumped just to breathe once more before they died. They jumped continually, from all four sides of the building, and from all floors above and around the building's fatal wound.

I can't imagine.

Update: Because I've linked to that Esquire story, I feel obliged to share this. According to Poynter, Esquire.com had the "worst 9/11 mixup imaginable" this morning. Its website had the Falling Man photo accompanying the headline: "Make Your Morning Commute More Stylish."

You’re whizzing through a good book or article, falling
into the scene, absorbing the imagery and warming up to the characters, and then
suddenly — a roadblock. You hit a word you don’t know.

Some gifted people are able to figure out the meaning just
by the context. Others need more clarity, or want it because they don’t trust
that the writer used the word correctly. And some don’t give a hoot, skipping over it entirely. This last group I can’t understand. Wouldn’t the ignorance
eat away at you? What happens when you meet that word again? Why not enrich
your vocabulary?

Few things are more enjoyable to me than learning new
words or seeing new places. Both activities expand a person’s worldliness and
intelligence, but only one can be done every day from the comfort of your couch, and
fairly inexpensively.

At least once a day I encounter an alien term or
phrase, either in literature or conversation. I always look it up, then write it down. The most recent entries on my
running list of new-to-me-at-least words include: antediluvian, unctuous, modus
operandi, limn and daedal.

Smarter than I, you probably already know the
definitions. If not… well, to which above group do you belong?

Many journalism instructors have declared war against the "$10 word," explaining that readers want to easily sail through copy without being tripped up by foreign terms. This might be a suitable rule of thumb for bare-bones news stories, but in columns, editorials, features or long-form pieces, big words should be welcomed.

Certain columnists consistently have me reaching for my dictionary. (And by dictionary, of course I mean iPhone, which I use to Google the word.) But I will admit, excessive use of $10 words can overwhelm, turning me away.

Recently I was talking with a colleague about (what I think is the) looming extinction of certain complex English words. Our texting culture has created a penchant for abbreviation. Acronyms that originated on keypads have infiltrated verbal conversation. But considering most cell phones nowadays are equipped with predictive text, why aren't we all more daring with our lexicon? Spelling is now a breeze. Get the first few letters right and the phone does the heavy lifting.

What I appreciate most about esoteric words is their precision. Our world and lives are unfathomably complicated. Why not at least
attempt to communicate in the most exact way possible?

Do you look up words you don't know? Learn any good ones lately? Please, enlighten me.

Friday, September 06, 2013

Both [Edward] Jones and
[Charles] McGill — like others I talked to in the neighborhood — are warily
optimistic about the arrival of whole foods. Optimistic because they know
something needs to change, something to lift the spirits and the opportunities
of the people of Englewood. Wary because they can’t shake the fear that change
may be a code word for routing poor people.

These sentiments represent the No. 1 qualm with gentrification: It doesn't simply spruce up the neighborhood; it fundamentally changes it.

Superficially,
it’s hard to see why anyone would be
against revitalizing a somewhat foresaken area in desperate need of commerce. Englewood, a neighborhood that lost a quarter of its population in
the 2000s — nearly 20,000 people — and one that is certainly no stranger to crime, could benefit from an upscale grocer like
Whole Foods moving in and luring other high-end retailers to the area. And after all, that is the plan.

But then what? Trendy bars, boutiques and brunch spots
follow a few years later? Property developers transform dilapidated buildings into picturesque
and pricey apartments? By 2020, Englewood is the next Wicker Park, Logan Square or West Loop. The yuppie culture starts to
mask what came before it. Residents vacate, either because the lifestyle
becomes unaffordable, or because it no longer feels like
home.

All this speculation is premature, of course, but it forces one to think about the consequences of urban redevelopment (aka gentrification) and whether you consider it a blessing or an evil. I'm on the fence. Would love to hear any convincing arguments for or against, but I suspect many of you join me in the camp of, "It depends..."

Wednesday, August 28, 2013

The following column by Change of Subject contributing editor and editorial board coordinator Jessica Reynolds appeared in today's print editions on page two, where the vacationing John Kass' column usually appears

For years I've seen the car parked around Chicago's Edgewater neighborhood.

A white 1994 Cadillac limousine. Hand-painted on its sides in red: "Thou shall not kill. Stop killing. Stop violence." A Bible usually rests on the dash.

After years of speculation about who might drive the eccentric car, I slipped a note under the windshield wiper asking the owner to call me.

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

This tweet from Cook County Commissioner John Fritchey caught my eye as I skimmed through my Twitter feed Friday afternoon.

The juxtaposition of those two concerns implies the North Side one pales in comparison, but his message also points to a glaring characteristic about Chicago: It is comprised of two cities, each with its own set of priorities, problems and quality-of-life standards.

Most Chicagoans would agree the No. 1 problem is gun violence, but that doesn't mean all concerns less grave don't matter. We can all pinpoint flaws around the city we would like to see fixed, from the most severe to those that are simply inconvenient or annoying, which admittedly, most of mine are: Clean up the litter. Run more buses/trains during rush hour. Ticket rogue bikers who blow past stop signs and ride on sidewalks. Lure businesses to empty storefronts on my block. Fix this pothole. Replace that streetlight. The list goes on. None of these compare to living in fear of a bullet striking your child, but for many Chicago parents, that isn't an immediate worry.

For Chicagoans David Kolin and Jeannine Cordero, the complaint was the installation of a Divvy bike station in front of their Lakeview condo building. They argued that it's an eyesore and a magnet for crowds. While the location of one Divvy station might not outrage the entire city or win very many sympathizers, it certainly matters to the condo residents.

While other people who live in areas outside of the Divvy network might celebrate the arrival of a docking station in front of their apartment building, this particular condo association didn't. Remember, it's all relative. And regardless of their efforts, the station stays for now.

What would happen if city officials were to stop acknowledging and attending to the gripes about litter, cramped sidewalks and parking? Two options: Residents would either take matters into their own hands, or relocate to places where these types of concerns are promptly addressed — the suburbs. That last scenario will also happen — or will continue to happen — if Chicago can't get a handle on its violence.

It is human nature to be most concerned with problems that affect you most directly. For many of us, that isn't gun violence. That's not to say we shouldn't care, but it does mean we shouldn't just fold and accept all the smaller problems that exist in our city.

Update: Here is Fritchey's comment on the post:

In no way did I intend to insinuate that mundane problems shouldn't be a concern; they confront and annoy each of us on a daily basis. My point is that we need to, and have an obligation to, be concerned about the bigger problems that face our city as well.

The concern needs to come from not just the individual and community level but also from the collective media who need to spend as much time on the difficult stories as they do on the easy ones.

Much of Chicago sees the violence issue as not their problem because they don't see it on a daily basis. Much of Chicago simply sees it as simply a way of life precisely because they see it on a daily basis. When you combine these two factors, you get an utter lack of the outrage or demand for action that is required for real solutions to emerge.

But one way or another, morally, practically or economically, the violence issues affect each and every Chicagoan. There is a massive toll in the cost of the justice and healthcare systems as well as the mortal toll.

Acknowledging that what is needed is a reallocation of resources to things like job training and after-school programs rather than to more incarceration is just one key to a solution. And these reforms are ideas that can be embraced by those on all points of the political spectrum. But until we sufficiently focus on real solutions, the problems will persist.

If worrying about a Divvy station was the worst of all of our concerns, we'd all be leading charmed lives.

In Chicago, "out of sight, out of mind" couldn't be truer when it pertains to gun violence. If it's not a phenomenon in your community, you're likely only outraged about it when it's brought up in conversation or you see the stories in the newspaper or online each day. I agree with Fritchey, in that nothing will change until unemployment is substantially lower and graduation rates are higher, but in our cash-strapped city, I'm doubtful I'll ever see that day.

Monday, August 26, 2013

It was
painful to watch. Teenagers deliberately walking a few paces ahead, stopping
only to take pictures of all the newness as parents watched on,
their faces full of pride, excitement and a tinge of heartbreak noticeable to everyone around except their own new college freshman.

This was a
common sight at the Welcome Week family picnic at Loyola University last week,
which I stumbled upon during my nightly stroll through my alma mater's campus.
Watching hundreds of 18-year-olds interact with — or rather, attempt to
evade — their parents made me realize how much of a brat I must have been
to my own just five years earlier.

Those
first-night goodbyes were clearly hardest on parents. Most of the kids couldn’t
have appeared any more excited to embark on their new journey in academia
and the culture that accompanies it. Not a minute longer could they wait to make
friends, go to parties and, you know, expand their horizons.

The parents, albeit glowing with pride, seemed like they could’ve waited a few more
days… or years.

It seems at
no other time than college move-in day do kids want so little to do with their parents while their
parents want absolutely everything to do with them. It's not as if kids suddenly renounce their parents once they arrive on campus; I think they simply overlook them while captivated by all the potential that lay ahead. As I'm sure many of you remember, teens view college as the start of a highly anticipated chapter (Finally, FREEDOM!),
while parents, it seems, consider it mostly the end of one: Your baby has grown up.

In case
you have a teenager or "young adult" heading off to college this
year, you were once in those shoes or expect to be someday soon, you might
appreciate this Washington Post piece by Michael Gerson, "Saying
goodbye to my child, the youngster," who offers his perspective as a parent. Of course,
there exist far worse circumstances in which a parent could say
goodbye to a child. But I'm sure the Big Move to college is in its own way initially distressing for parents, whether their child is one mile or a thousand miles away.

Monday, August 19, 2013

History's first rule breakers, Adam and Eve, got in trouble for eating an apple, right? Not necessarily. The Bible doesn't stipulate which forbidden fruit they ate. Scholars have speculated that it might have been an apricot, a peach, a pomegranate or a fig. If Adam and Eve lived in the Middle East, as some assume, apples were not on their menu, since they didn't grow there in ancient times, according to archaeologists.

Friday, August 16, 2013

A Chicago man who objects to having to submit to drug testing as a condition of living in an apartment that he rents from the Chicago Housing Authority filed a lawsuit Thursday challenging the policy in federal court.

Joseph Peery, 58, has lived in the Parkside of Old Town mixed-income housing development on the Near North Side since 2010. Drug tests are required of all renters before they move into the complex and every year on renewal of a rental agreement, Peery said.

The ACLU of Illinois filed a class-action suit against the CHA on Thursday alleging that drug testing tenants is a violation of their Fourth Amendment rights, the story says. At Perry's complex, all residents are tested, even those who pay market rates and are not affilated with CHA. Regardless, an ACLU attorney argued the drugs tests target CHA renters. Otherwise, "they wouldn't be [drug testing] any renters," he said. Perry, who said he doesn't do drugs, objects to the testing because he thinks the process is humiliating.

Because the property is mixed income, I'm sure there are prospective renters put off by the idea of CHA residents — because they assume they're druggies. I left a message with the property management firm asking why they choose to drug test their residents. No answer yet, but common sense would tell me it's to create the image of a clean, hospitable environment.

Drug testing only CHA renters would be discrimination, but testing tenants across-the-board seems reasonable. While most tenants probably don't do drugs, the stereotype exists. If drug tests help lure residents of higher incomes so that the building can truly be diverse, keep testing.

About "Change of Subject."

"Change of Subject" by Chicago Tribune op-ed columnist Eric Zorn contains observations, reports, tips, referrals and tirades, though not necessarily in that order. Links will tend to expire, so seize the day. For an archive of Zorn's latest Tribune columns click here. An explanation of the title of this blog is here. If you have other questions, suggestions or comments, send e-mail to ericzorn at gmail.com.
More about Eric Zorn

Contributing editor Jessica Reynolds is a 2012 graduate of Loyola University Chicago and is the coordinator of the Tribune's editorial board. She can be reached at jreynolds at tribune.com.